Query failed: connection to localhost:9312 failed (errno=111, msg=Connection refused). FBI wants to wiretap the Internet - General Discussion Discussions on AppleInsider Forums Toggle navigation All Forums Recent Posts Sign In FBI wants to wiretap the Internet aquatic Posted: March 13, 2004 9:55PM in General Discussion edited January 2014 The FBI wants to be able to wiretap the entire Internet. http://news.google.com/url?ntc=0M4B2...8-5172948.htmlWTF mate? Does anyone support this? Groverat, SDW, et al? «12»Comments Reply 1 of 34 ast3r3x Posts: 5,012member March 13, 2004 9:55PM Yeah I read that...how Big Brother-ish is that? Reply 2 of 34 splinemodel Posts: 7,311member March 13, 2004 9:57PM Quote:Originally posted by Aquatic The FBI wants to be able to wiretap the entire Internet. http://news.google.com/url?ntc=0M4B2...8-5172948.htmlWTF mate? Does anyone support this? Groverat, SDW, et al? No, I don't think anyone does. I'd like to get all of the fvckheads in government who honestly think this kind of authority is a good thing, lock 'em all in a shipping container, and fire it to Mars. Reply 3 of 34 aquatic Posts: 5,602member March 13, 2004 10:03PM Hey that'll go nicely with Bush's new Mars initiative. Will we still be using moon rocks to power the rocket ships? Reply 4 of 34 ganondorf Posts: 573member March 13, 2004 10:19PM It's not even the principle that's the problem. It's not like I'm really opposed to law enforcement getting a court order to spy on a criminal suspect. It's the FBI telling hardware/software manufacturers and ISPs what to do, how to make their products, and to FORCE them to build backdoors into them.It's also the fact that this will give birth to new regulatory agencies that will effect the direction of new communication technologies. Sad. Reply 5 of 34 ebby Posts: 3,110member March 13, 2004 11:18PM Actually I'm surprised. I thought there was already a system like that in place. Maybe this is just expanding on that.\ Reply 6 of 34 existence Posts: 991member March 13, 2004 11:38PM Of course, Kerry voted for the Patriot Act and is not likely to speak out against this. The only choice for real change is Ralph Nader. Reply 7 of 34 fred_lj Posts: 607member March 14, 2004 12:28AM Just another business ploy...create jobs in some useless department again. Gee, I guess we can all just work for the government one day, right? But this is going a bit too far. If anything, this could be done on an as-needed basis, as Verzion demonstrated they have done before in the article. I see no problem in broadband suppliers being cooperative, but this is not good at all for an economy already in the dumps, regardless of how delusional the administration is thereto. Reply 8 of 34 scott Posts: 7,431member March 14, 2004 7:09AM You people are so overboard it's stupid. The FBI sent a proposal to the FCC. They want this technology to do legal searches. It would equal what they have for the phones now.Oh wait I gotta fit in a Bu$h and AKKKcroft into this post. Reply 9 of 34 artman @_@ Posts: 2,546member March 14, 2004 10:00AM Well. Since the corporations have muddled the internet into a commercial spamire...and the feds now want in (@ an added cost to us of course)....I'm going back to reading books, talking to people with cans & string and sending messages by carrier pigeon... Reply 10 of 34 ganondorf Posts: 573member March 14, 2004 10:04AM Quote:Originally posted by Scott You people are so overboard it's stupid.The same sentiments are being echoed across the political spectrum. Maybe you should keep up with the news, or at least formulate a coherent argument, before you start calling people stupid. Reply 11 of 34 trick fall Posts: 1,271member March 14, 2004 10:29AM Scott it's just that we're so tired of these regulatory loving fiscally irresponsible conservatives. I personally don't want the gov't to be able to tap all calls easily. If they want to listen in they should have to work hard to do it. Reply 12 of 34 moogs Posts: 4,296member March 14, 2004 11:24AM Scott, Who says what they can do with phones right now is "a good thing"? It is a system set up for easy abuse. So we should do the same with the internet? Don't be so eager to defend this administration's every move; they are not looking out for you nearly as much as you are for them. But make no mistake: they are counting on millions just like you to assume "everything is OK / no big deal / let them do what they want".We're not overboard at all. And this isn't just about the next administration or the one after... once something like this goes into effect, you can't take it back. All it takes are a few misguided idiots in high places to make this a truly scary proposition. The fact that the phone system is already heavily compromised makes the internet ALL THE MORE important to keep as private as possible. Name another means of mass communication where people from all corners of the nation (and globe) can share information during good times or bad, with little fear of being monitored. You can't, because there isn't another.Once the internet is compromised as a means of anonymous communiction, it will likely remain so indefinitely. That's not to say they couldn't illegally monitor things, but why on earth would you want to make it easy for them to just do whatever they want, when they want, without public notice or warrants? Wake up.If this passes I would seriously consider dropping my internet service in the only form of protest that the companies will notice (losing my dollars). This is so Orwellian it's ridiculous. I hope this gets a lot of press / the internet companies fight back or file suit. The government has no business doing this.GMAFB already. Enough with the "everything is OK as long as it's part of the WOT" crap! Reply 13 of 34 wrong robot Posts: 3,907member March 14, 2004 6:53PM Quote:Originally posted by Moogs GMAFB already. Enough with the "everything is OK as long as it's part of the WOT" crap! needed to be said again Reply 14 of 34 bunge Posts: 7,329member March 14, 2004 7:18PM scott's a troll everyone. Haven't you figured it out yet? Reply 15 of 34 sammi jo Posts: 4,634member March 14, 2004 7:37PM Its the wrong damned way round, re. surveillance. We the people should be the ones putting our government under surveillance. We the people are their bosses and employ them to work for us. If they can't get it right, we should be dumping them. Its what America is all about.Except Scott, of course, who loves sitting on big brother's lap! ewwwwww Reply 16 of 34 wrong robot Posts: 3,907member March 14, 2004 7:52PM Quote:Originally posted by sammi jo Its the wrong damned way round, re. surveillance. We the people should be the ones putting our government under surveillance. We the people are their bosses and employ them to work for us. If they can't get it right, we should be dumping them. Its what America is all about. bravo! Reply 17 of 34 scott Posts: 7,431member March 14, 2004 7:59PM I'm sorry you guys are right. We shouldn't regulate industry to help the FBI to conduct legal investigations of criminals.It's not even worth considering in a proposal to the FCC. I should have had a hysterical hissy fit like the rest of you. Reply 18 of 34 bunge Posts: 7,329member March 14, 2004 8:13PM Quote:Originally posted by Scott I'm sorry you guys are right. We shouldn't regulate industry to help the FBI to conduct legal investigations of criminals. No, we shouldn't. Privacy and freedom are more important. Reply 19 of 34 scott Posts: 7,431member March 14, 2004 8:29PM Nothing the FBI propose violates the Bill of Rights. Reply 20 of 34 bunge Posts: 7,329member March 14, 2004 8:44PM Quote:Originally posted by Scott Nothing the FBI propose violates the Bill of Rights. What the hell does that have to do with anything? What they propose isn't good. «12» Sign In or Register to comment.